In a recent decision, the Ontario Superior Court, under Justice Edward Morgan, dismissed a lawsuit against Canadian multinational Barrick Gold Corp regarding alleged human rights abuses purportedly committed by the company at its North Mara Mine in Tanzania. The court concluded that Tanzanian courts are better suited to address the case, thus invoking the doctrine of forum non conveniens or inconvenient forum. Justice Morgan’s decision highlights the ongoing debate about the jurisdictional reach of Canadian courts over international human rights allegations involving Canadian companies.
The plaintiffs accused Barrick Gold and local security personnel of being complicit in severe human rights violations, including the deaths of at least five people, and other abuses in proximity to the mine. Allegations also extend to claims of corruption within the Tanzanian police, claiming collusion with Barrick Gold in these violations. The plaintiffs argued that given Barrick Gold’s operational control over the mine and its environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies, the company had a duty of care towards the local villagers. The full statement of claims details the allegations put forth by the plaintiffs.
Barrick Gold countered the claims by emphasizing the suit was not within the jurisdiction and that it would be more appropriately handled in Tanzanian courts, a standpoint the court ultimately supported. Justice Morgan further addressed concerns regarding the Tanzanian legal system, countering the plaintiff’s assertion of its deficiencies. He argued that unlike scenarios where jurisdictions have shown gross inadequacies, as was the case in Nevsun Resources Ltd v Araya, Tanzania provides a competent legal framework comparable to Canada.
This dismissal underscores the complex legal landscape Canadian companies navigate when operating globally, especially in nations where judicial processes may differ significantly. Justice Morgan’s dismissal can be viewed as reaffirmation that not all claims brought against Canadian companies for operations abroad will be entertained in Canadian courts, particularly when viable legal avenues exist within the host country. More details about the decision can be found in the official court document.
For further reading, visit the full article on JURIST.